Date of Decision: OCT. 25, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Researcher
Field: Biology (specifically microbiology)
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge of the work of others: The Petitioner had served as a judge of the work of others in the same field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner had published scholarly articles in peer-reviewed journals.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance in the Field:
- The Petitioner failed to establish that his contributions were of major significance. Although his work had been cited, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how these citations indicated a major impact on the field. High citation counts and publication in reputable journals alone were not sufficient to prove major significance without evidence of the work’s influence or implementation in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- The Petitioner had several articles published in reputable journals such as Journal of Nutrition and Environmental Health Perspectives. However, the presence of articles in prestigious journals did not automatically establish that these works were of major significance.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Despite claims of significant contributions, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that his research had a major impact on the field. Citations and publication in top journals were not deemed enough to establish the extraordinary ability without further evidence of the work’s influence.
Participation as a Judge:
- The Petitioner served as a judge for the work of others in his field, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- The Petitioner had authored several scholarly articles, fulfilling this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not applicable.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Google Scholar Citations: Evidence of citation counts for published articles.
- Altmetric Attention Scores: Data indicating the attention received by the Petitioner’s articles on social media and other platforms.
- Testimonial Letters: Letters from experts in the field supporting the significance of the Petitioner’s work. However, these letters were found lacking in specific examples of the Petitioner’s impact on the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents that fulfill at least three of the ten criteria. Furthermore, the evidence provided did not support the claim of sustained national or international acclaim or demonstrate that the Petitioner was among the top individuals in his field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence to address the deficiencies noted in the decision or explore other visa classifications for which he may qualify.
